8 February 2012

Learning journey: Joseph Rowntree School, York

By Jane Branson | 19 December 2008

Key stage 3, year 9:
Designing an information tower for the new school building

An image of a student working at a desk.

Joseph Rowntree students working on their information tower designs © Timothy Marvell

The new school building included a central, covered street as a meeting point. The project was to design and potentially construct a tower that would display information about events and initiatives at the school.

What were we trying to achieve?
Curriculum areas
Art & design
Personal, learning and thinking skills:

  • independent enquirers
  • creative thinkers
  • team workers.

Every Child Matters outcomes:

  • enjoying and achieving
  • making a positive contribution.

Building Schools for the Future programme

Learning objectives
For students to:

  • understand the processes involved in an architectural project, including negotiation with clients and other key players; the balance of creative and practical work; and all the considerations involved in design
  • learn about architecture, including key architectural terms, architectural styles and elements from existing architecture.
An image of students working at a desk.

Joseph Rowntree students working on their information tower designs © Timothy Marvell

How did we organise our learning?
Activities
Activity 1
Brief history of Western architecture. Homework: identify different building styles in York.

Activity 2
Using collage materials, students created 2D images of towers on a mood board. Students then produced a cardboard model tower using only two sheets of card and one small box. Through these activities, students developed their design ideas with guidance from professional architects.

Activity 3
In teams, students were briefed to create a tower design for the school site. Teams pitched their designs to a building contractor in a bid to have their tower built. Designs were shortlisted.

Activity 4
The teams with the shortlisted designs made a quarter-sized model. Final models were put to the vote by the whole school. The winning tower model was to be constructed on site.

Resources used

  • school grounds
  • online interactive worksheet
  • collage materials
  • model-making materials.

Funding
£1,500 was received as a (CABE) educational grant.

How well have we achieved our aims?
Outcomes

  • Working in a real-world context was highly motivating and gave students confidence when dealing with professionals from outside the school.
  • Students were able to understand the creative process involved in architecture, and appreciate the need for a creative and practical balance when grappling with new architectural ideas.
  • Teachers are more confident about using IT creatively and structuring open-ended group work to encourage higher-level thinking skills.

The head of art commented: ‘I now plan to include architecture in [our] programme of study every year. It is there, it surrounds us. It is in every town and place. It is accessible. It is the one design form that shapes our lives more than any other.’

An image of students working at a desk.

Joseph Rowntree students working on their information tower designs © Timothy Marvell

What worked well

  • Because the learning experiences were carefully sequenced, the students were encouraged to explore new possibilities, rather than completing their designs too quickly or replicating ideas they had already seen.
  • Constructing a cardboard model at an early stage allowed the students to understand the problem in 3D and to be more expansive and radical in their thinking.
  • Students discussed their ideas with architects and designers, worked closely with a designer to refine and present their final proposal, and finally pitched their ideas to adults. All these activities increased student confidence and provided real-life learning experiences.

What didn’t work so well

  • Working in a real-life context meant students encountered real-life problems; it was difficult to sell the idea to the school build committee, none of whom had relevant architectural experience.
  • Keeping the project open-ended meant that students could not be given a clear idea of what the final object might look like or how it might function.
  • Students’ thinking turned out to be more radical than those in control of the build.
  • After the shortlist had been compiled, the information tower became obsolete because it was superseded by a new IT system. However, the shortlisted designs were very dramatic and could be developed into iconic sculptures for the new site.
  • Back to top
  • | Print this article
  • | Email this article
  • | Bookmark and Share